Ocasio v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department

10 F. App'x 471
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided March 26, 2001·No. No. 00-15777; D.C. No. CV-98-1747-JBR·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

MEMORANDUM2

Alexander Ocasio appeals pro se the summary judgment of the district court in his employment discrimination action. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

We review summary judgment de novo. Baker v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co., 143 F.3d 1260, 1263 (9th Cir.1998). Because Ocasio failed to respond to defendant’s requests for admissions, the district court properly deemed the matters admitted pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 36(a) and, in the absence of any disputed issues of material fact, properly granted summary judgment. See O’Campo v. Hardisty, 262 F.2d 621, 623-24 (9th Cir.1958) (affirming summary judgment based on unanswered requests for admissions).

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Ocasio v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, 10 F. App'x 471 (9th Cir. 2001).

10 F. App'x 471 (Ocasio v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Petros v. Duncan
E.D. California, 2020